High Court Kerala High Court

Suresh vs M.P.Vijayakumar on 23 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
Suresh vs M.P.Vijayakumar on 23 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1176 of 2004()


1. SURESH, S/O. SUBHADRAMMA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. M.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O. PRABHAKARAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :23/07/2010

 O R D E R
              A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.

            ------------------------------------------------------

                         M.A.C.A. 1176 of 2004

            ------------------------------------------------------

                          Dated: JULY 23, 2010

                               JUDGMENT

Barkath Ali, J.

This appeal under Sec.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the

claimant is directed against the judgment and award of he Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in OP(MV) 1214/2000 dated

September 27, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs.29,898/- for the

loss caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained by him

in a motor accident.

2. On November 9, 1999 at about 9.30 p.m. while the claimant

was travelling in an autorickshaw bearing Regn. No.KL-8/M 7297

driven by the 1st respondent along Amalanagar – Parappur public road,

and reached at Chittilappilly, the autorickshaw capsized and the

claimant sustained serious injuries. Claiming a compensation of

Rs.1,55,000/- he filed the OP before the Tribunal under Sec.166 of the

Motor Vehicles Act alleging negligence against the 1st respondent,

driver of the offending autorickshaw.

3. Respondent No.1 was the owner-cum-driver of the offending

autorickshaw and the 2nd respondent was the insurer of the same.

Only the 2nd respondent/insurer contested the matter, but admitted

M.A.C.A. 1176 of 2004
2

the policy.

4. The claimant was examined as PW.1 and Exts.A1 to A17

were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal. On an

appreciation of evidence the Tribunal awarded a compensation of

Rs29,898/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till

realisation and a cost of Rs.300/-. The claimant has now come up

in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the

Tribunal.

5. Heard the counsel for the appellant/claimant and the

counsel for the Insurance Company.

6. The claimant sustained the following injuries as revealed from

Ext.A12, copy of the wound certificate, and Ext.A13 discharge

summary, issued from the hospital:

1. lacerated wound above right eye-brow transverse 7 cm x 1 cm

bone deep.

2. lacerated wound just below right lower eye-lid 3 x 1 cm with skin

loss and exposing the bone.

3. abrasion right forehead.

4. abrasion dorsum of hand right side 5 x 5 cm.

5. abrasion over upper lip 3 x 2 cm.

6. injury over tragus of left ear 2 cm long with exposure of cartilage.

7. The claimant was an Upper Division Clerk in Judicial I Class

Magistrate Court – II, Thrissur, earning a salary of Rs.4290/- with DA

M.A.C.A. 1176 of 2004
3

Rs.1373/- and HRA Rs.180/- as revealed from Ext.A17 salary

certificate. Taking into consideration all these aspects, the Tribunal

awarded a total compensation of Rs.29,898/-. The break up of the

compensation is as under:

loss of leave                              -    Rs.3398/-

transportation                             -        350/-

extra nourishment                          -        350/-

damages to clothing                        -         300/-

expenses for treatment and bystanders       -       8000/-

pain and suffering                          -       7500/-

disability, loss of amenities and disfigurement – 10000/-

Counsel for the claimant sought enhancement of the compensation on

all heads.

8. No compensation was awarded by the Tribunal for the loss of

amenities and enjoyment of life. Taking into consideration the fact

that the claimant has sustained loss of hearing of his left ear and a

facial scar just below the right eye as revealed from Ext.A14 series and

Ext.A15 series, audiogram readings and the certificate issued by the

doctor, we feel that a compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be

reasonable for the loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. As there is

a serious scar on the face, for the disfigurement caused, another

compensation of Rs.10,000/- would be, in our view, reasonable. As

M.A.C.A. 1176 of 2004
4

regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the

same to be reasonable and therefore we are not disturbing the same.

9. Thus the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of

Rs.20,000/-. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum

which is very low. He is entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum for

the compensation already awarded and for the enhanced

compensation from the date of petition till realisation and

proportionate cost. The 2nd respondent being the insurer of the

offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within

two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The

award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent.

The appeal is disposed of as found above.

A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE

P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

mt/-